F4F wildcat Vs. Me 109

Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules

Whats a matter with you people ?! This incident took place in 1945 ! By then the 109 was vastly superior to the F4F Wildcat and F6F Hellcat.

The maneuverability of these aircraft was roughly the same, while the 109 enjoyed a tremendous speed and climb advantage.

Its like choosing a Zero over a F4U-4 Corsair, it makes just as little sense..
 
Soren said:
The maneuverability of these aircraft was roughly the same, while the 109 enjoyed a tremendous speed and climb advantage.
Click to expand...
That it did, but again I've seen information to state the F4F-3 was actually more maneuverable than the Me-109E.

I think many tend to think of the F4F as this stubby little plug that couldn't maneuver well, the opposite is actually the truth, the F4F was highly maneuverable, the problem here is the F4F always got a bad rap on maneuverability because its always compared to its main adversary - the Zero, one of the most maneuverable aircraft of WW2 under 300 mph!!!!

But I'd have to Agree with Soren, If I had to pick between the 2 I'd take the Me-109 any-day!
 
FLYBOYJ,

Yes, the F4F was certainly a very maneuverable fighter, having a wing-loading of a mere 30.5 lbs/sq.ft. and a wing with an above average Cl-max. The F4F was definitely more maneuverable than the Me-109E, but it would have a very hard time against the superior Bf-109F however.

And while probably being more maneuverable than any Allied or Axis fighter by 45 in the ETO, the F4F was however no match for these much speedier and faster climbing fighters.

By mid 1942 the Wildcat was completely obsolete for operating in the ETO.
 
agree.....

I think the FM-2 put a little "shot" into the design but even then too it was quickly outclassed but still did surprisingly well in the Pacific and in its limited combat in the ETO...
 
it was better at the PTO cause the good pilots were dying faster than the newbies could gain experience
and good planes came out late
 
loomaluftwaffe said:
it was better at the PTO cause the good pilots were dying faster than the newbies could gain experience
and good planes came out late
Click to expand...

192 F4Fs were lost the entire war...The Zero wasn't flown to its full potential and the F4F did a lot better than given credit for...

End all, the USN had better tactics and combat discipline....
 
although being all old style and following your emperor is OK, old Samurai tactics dont go with modern weapons
 
I'm gonna go against the grain, and stay with the F4F4, or the FM-2. Call me crazy, but I'd like to be able to dive then turn fast enough that I can get the any guys that might be on my tail. The dive would be to catch up to any faster planes, and then I would rip their wings and pilot to shreds with concentrated .50 caliber fire. Personal preference in the mk. of the plane lies in the F4F-3 or the FM-2 because of the higher speeds and the larger amount of ammo.

it spoke of the F4F being more maneuvable and having a greater dive speed (becuase of it's weight?)
Click to expand...

It would be logical that the F4F4 or FM-2 would dive fast due to high weight, because as a certain law of physics states "an object in motion must remain in motion unless acted upon." Added to the fact that the heavier something is, the harder it is to stop and the faster it moves when falling (and no, I don't include the test on the Moon that shows objects falling at the same speed). I'm not a math person, and college is a year away, so you'll have to excuse me if I don't go into large equations.
 
Yeah, and I guess you'd choose a Zero over a F4U-4 Corsair as-well ?? I thought not

The FM-2 has a pathetic climb rate, a pathetic energy retention and last but not least a VERY slow top speed. It was no match for the fighters roaming the skies in the ETO by 45.
 
Agree, they did have an excellent kill ratio in the Pacific late in the war becuase there were little skilled pilots to challenge them...

I believe an FM-2 got the last kill of the war....
 
anyways the F4F would have been pathetic in ETO, I think they will be hacked up alot worse than shortly after Pearl Harbor
 
loomaluftwaffe said:
anyways the F4F would have been pathetic in ETO, I think they will be hacked up alot worse than shortly after Pearl Harbor
Click to expand...

Here we go! looma - Listen real Carefully - WRONG, WRONG, WRONG, WRONG!!!!!!!!

By the time it was starting to be withdrawn from front line service the F4F had between a 4 to 1 to 7 to 1 kill ratio (depending who you talk to) over the Zero. Even during Midway the F4F attained a 1.5 to 1 kill ratio over the Zero!!!

189 F4F/FM-2'S were lost in air-to-air combat during WW2 - they claimed 1327 Zeros.

You were saying?????

The F4F-3 or 4 would of been a good match for the Me-109E.....
 
Yeah, and I guess you'd choose a Zero over a F4U-4 Corsair as-well ?? I thought not
Click to expand...

That is completely different, one plane actually has armor and can dive and turn while diving pretty well, while the other cannot. In my case, both planes can dive well, and the 109 probably retained the speed for longer, but the F4F would be moving through the verticle through the whole attack. If the 109 wants to follow, it does so on the F4Fs terms, and then it has to deal with the punishment that the F4F can absorb. As for the low top speed, can you really say that a 109 patrolling late in the war would be doing so at top speed the moment it left the tarmac?
Yes, there is a speed descrepency, but by using boom-and-zoom tactics, this can be rectified by the Wild Cat pilots.
 
The F4F has advantages over the Bf-109E but if depending on boom and zoom tatcics the Bf-109 will undoubtly have the edge, not the F4F. The verticle is the advantage of the Messer. To overtake a tactic working well against the even worser vertical flying Zero wouldn´t be that a wise choice if facing the -109.
The most striking advantage for equal skilled combattants always was numerical superiority in dogfights.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)

Similar threads

Spitfire vs Me-109
Replies
3
Views
1K
PAT303
P
J
Yak-9U Vs Bf-109
Replies
0
Views
730
Jerrybandit67
J
Z
Large gun Me 109
2 3
Replies
47
Views
3K
Engineman
E
S
Why did the Me 109 roll and turn so bad at speed?
5 6 7
Replies
134
Views
9K
GregP
Sakai Saburo Vs Sugita Sho-ichi
2 3 4
Replies
70
Views
3K
GrauGeist
Menu
Log in
Register